I shall continue my negative trend and add Yuna and Mao to this list... Because I'm tired of hearing how awesome, amazing, and more talented than everybody else - when the reality is that they don't have a full set of triple jumps. Sure, CoP allows for this but having spent my entire life watching skaters struggle to get and keep these jumps - I struggle with the modern ideal of "perfection"

There doesn't seem to be anything in the singles and pairs rules that explicitly requires music, but the use of music is implied by a number of the rules, especially regarding the Interpretation component. The rules for singles and pairs say that the music is the skater's choice, except that vocal music with lyrics isn't allowed.

So in theory they could choose silent "music" without deduction, but they would likely suffer in several of the component scores, especially Interpretation.

If most skaters use music, then there wouldn't be any special time indication for those who chose to do without. They'd have to feel the correct amount of time themselves. It would be easier for short programs where the time limit is a maximum -- just choreograph the program to be complete in well under 2:50, and even if it runs a little longer than usual one day it should still be safe. If it runs shorter, there's never any problem.

Fitting right in between 3:50 and 4:10 or between 4:20 and 4:40 without audio cues and with variations in execution would be trickier.

And how quickly that thread turned into a C.O.P bash. Wow. It seems like that is pretty common around here these days...

Seems the 6.0 said the one that can do the most crowd pleasing routine and has some equality in jumps with the rest of the field will win. That is not the case anymore. 99 yard run back is not a touchdown even if it was the best play of the game., a 124 does not beat a 125 even if they tried harder and had a prettier dress - not to mention more fans.

I think there is a huge difference in the philosophies of ordinal scoring versus the Code of Points. The very words "ordinal" and "points" tell the story.

In ordinal scoring the goal that we strive for is that the competitor who skates best ought to win.

In the CoP it is: the skater who scores the most points ought to win.

Best...most.

If we go for "most points," then, yes, this makes figure skating "more like other sports." Is that our goal, to have a sport that is more like other sports and less like itself?

About "silent music," Michelle Kwan's cut of The Feeling Begins that she used in her 2004 short program ends with several seconds where the music dies to such a low whisper that in the arena it can't be heard at all. Every time Michelle skated it, it looked like she finished behind her music, since she was still skating and you couldn't hear any music.

Plus, the choreography was planned for exactly 2:40 seconds to the dot. At U.S. Ntionals she went over by a second or two, but did not get caught. At 2004 Worlds she did get caught, and took a costly one-tenth deduction in both the technical and presentation marks.

The next year the ISU decided to extend the time limit for the short program to 2:50 seconds. (I don't know whether team Kwan lobbied to have the new rule applied retroactively and give Michelle silver instead of bronze for the year before. Seems only fair to me. )

I think there is a huge difference in the philosophies of ordinal scoring versus the Code of Points. The very words "ordinal" and "points" tell the story.

In ordinal scoring the goal that we strive for is that the competitor who skates best ought to win.

In the CoP it is: the skater who scores the most points ought to win.

Best...most.

If we go for "most points," then, yes, this makes figure skating "more like other sports." Is that our goal, to have a sport that is more like other sports and less like itself?

I tend to agree with you..... but also can see that taking the meaning of the words "best" and "most" so literally in your example might not be the only way to consider this.

The goal of CoP is to score the most points. But the skater who scores the most points could also be considered the best - since the rules are the same for all the skaters.

Looking back at Vancouver - some have claimed Mao with her 3A's and Plushy with his quads were the best because they both did jumps the Gold medal winners did not even attempt.

Perhaps under 6.0 the results might have been different. But if they were different what would it prove? Would it mean 6.0 decided in the fairest manner possible who the "best" skaters were ?

Isn't that the goal of CoP as well? Did CoP get it wrong in Vancouver?
I only questioned one podium - the bronze in Dance felt wrong to me as I had that team 5th. But the rest of the placements - under the existing rules - seemed OK.

I think the skaters who gave the best Olympic performances were also the same skaters who scored the most points.

Now if I were to consider US Natls - another story altogether

CoP is still so new. It needs some fine tuning but i think on the whole it does a good job of getting the placements right. A problem I have is with the levels - and how too many skaters are doing the same moves which I think has led to a loss of creativity.

In Jackson Haines' day there was no such thing as competitive Free Style skating. (After all, someone has to invent a sport before there can be any competitions )

Interesting point. Source, please that there was no Free Skating Program attached to the School Figures Sport during Haines' times.

In those days competitions were held in tracing school figures only. Haines won the first U.S. figure skating championship in 1864, but when he tried to embellish his performances by throwing in some dance moves he was basically run out of town.

We all know about School Figures which were even active through Kwan's early years. Was it Annette Poetche(sp) which finally terminated School Figures from competition?
I really didn't know if Haines bothered with competitions.

In Vienna he founded what became known as the Vienna School of figure skating -- essentially, the sport of free skating that we know today, as opposed to school figures. Jackson died young (in 1875) but his students and disciples n the Vienna School extended his work and formed the International Skating Union in 1892. The ISU began the work of organizing figure skating championships which included free style. The first World Championship was held in 1896 -- one imagines, with Haines smiling down in approval. ?

You've done quite a bit on Haines. Did you know, he was born in Canada? and that he invented the sitzspin and that in Roller Artistic skating it is known as a 'jackson'.

Indeed she did. Kronenberger won four consecutive ladies World Championships, 1908-1911 (accoding to Wikipedia. )

But could music and kronenberger have changed the course of figure skating, or was it really Midori Ito?

I see, it was a response. I should have looked into that more but I am still glad that I made the point to people who cannot keep word definitions with the word it belongs to. - maybe another issue there. lololol ~ oh Seani.

Anyhoo, B.O.T.T Henie. Sonja put FS in the attention of the world. Right person at the right time changed the outlook of FS from the world spectator p.o.v. For me personally it was Kwan who was the MOST but I think Dorthy, Scott and Peggy planted the seed in me anyway.

Seems the 6.0 said the one that can do the most crowd pleasing routine and has some equality in jumps with the rest of the field will win. That is not the case anymore. 99 yard run back is not a touchdown even if it was the best play of the game., a 124 does not beat a 125 even if they tried harder and had a prettier dress - not to mention more fans.

The big thing now is, IS THIS REALLY BEING INSTIGATED or are judges still waxing scoured and as influenced as the audience. And personal adversity being overcome before a skating event SHOULD NOT be taken into consideration. ALL life is relative to individuals and judgment should be based on that one performance and NOTHING else.

Seanibu - I have to agree with you about Sonia popularizing figure skating more than anyone else, but you must understand that today's fans do not want to go back that far and give her credit. They assume it is their national favorite in the 22nd century who popularized figure skating. More contemporary posters just resent her. What I fear the most is History Revisionists at work.

As to CoP v. 6.0. I believe the results are the same. With my own method, I can watch a competition and place the top 5 in order of success. I don't need protocols and until they give me a slo-mo of WETs and URs, I'll just say they are wrong. I'm 98% right on. It was that damn Gottenberg Worlds where I could not decide whether Buttle or Joubert should win. Sometimes it's close and CoP to the rescue.

I think the skaters who gave the best Olympic performances were also the same skaters who scored the most points.

You got it, JanFan. 98% of the time what one sees as the best, are the ones with the most points. That is, if and ony if, the spectator actually did some skating. And, of course one assumes all the judges are on the up and up.

I tend to agree with you..... but also can see that taking the meaning of the words "best" and "most" so literally in your example might not be the only way to consider this.

The goal of CoP is to score the most points. But the skater who scores the most points could also be considered the best - since the rules are the same for all the skaters.

Looking back at Vancouver - some have claimed Mao with her 3A's and Plushy with his quads were the best because they both did jumps the Gold medal winners did not even attempt.

Perhaps under 6.0 the results might have been different. But if they were different what would it prove? Would it mean 6.0 decided in the fairest manner possible who the "best" skaters were ?

Isn't that the goal of CoP as well? Did CoP get it wrong in Vancouver?
I only questioned one podium - the bronze in Dance felt wrong to me as I had that team 5th. But the rest of the placements - under the existing rules - seemed OK.

I think the skaters who gave the best Olympic performances were also the same skaters who scored the most points.

Now if I were to consider US Natls - another story altogether

CoP is still so new. It needs some fine tuning but i think on the whole it does a good job of getting the placements right. A problem I have is with the levels - and how too many skaters are doing the same moves which I think has led to a loss of creativity.

Its interesting because you are right in regards to placements under CoP, esp. in terms of the Olympics. My only exceptions to placements being I thought Miki was a bit underscored, Johnny WAAAYY underscored - but that tends to be true since the beginning of skating. Fans disagree with the judges and life goes on.

My biggest issue with CoP are the scores themselves... In Kwanford's Perfect World - technical prowess would be rewarded to ensure the sport continues to be "bigger, faster, higher" - innovation across the board isn't encouraged so skaters don't have the incentive to push. A complete set of triple jumps would also get a bonus over tagging a 2axle onto jumps just to rack up points.

I also have an issue with what I see as leniency towards falls. It makes no sense that an under rotated jump is severly penialized where a fall is not. One thing that 6.0 got right was the harshness of the fall. Again, in my perfect world - I wouldn't give a single point for a fall. Don't throw it, if you can't land it.

I also have an issue with what I see as leniency towards falls. It makes no sense that an under rotated jump is severly penialized where a fall is not. One thing that 6.0 got right was the harshness of the fall. Again, in my perfect world - I wouldn't give a single point for a fall. Don't throw it, if you can't land it.

What a SANE comment!. (It would never happend in Ice Dancing) To see somone sprawled out on the ice is ok except for a -1, and another who continues the flow of the program but was 46 degrees from the "perfect" landing, get trashed. You know how I feel about skaters who can not execute elements by definitions, and who actually benefit by cheating. DUH! Where is the Sport?

Unless there is a review of the major errors of a singles figure skater, the so-called sport will dwindle each year.

Its interesting because you are right in regards to placements under CoP, esp. in terms of the Olympics. My only exceptions to placements being I thought Miki was a bit underscored, Johnny WAAAYY underscored - but that tends to be true since the beginning of skating. Fans disagree with the judges and life goes on.

My biggest issue with CoP are the scores themselves... In Kwanford's Perfect World - technical prowess would be rewarded to ensure the sport continues to be "bigger, faster, higher" - innovation across the board isn't encouraged so skaters don't have the incentive to push. A complete set of triple jumps would also get a bonus over tagging a 2axle onto jumps just to rack up points.

I also have an issue with what I see as leniency towards falls. It makes no sense that an under rotated jump is severly penialized where a fall is not. One thing that 6.0 got right was the harshness of the fall. Again, in my perfect world - I wouldn't give a single point for a fall. Don't throw it, if you can't land it.

I agree with you - but whether or not Miki and Johnny were undermarked - I still did not see them on the podium.

I mentioned "fine tuning" but could have said "adjustments."
I don't agree with the UR rules or the "complete your rotations but fall" situation.

I think many judges need to be more conscientous about pcs - especially TR, IN and CH.
Do we really need a skater to say "neither one of us has transitions" before judges will recognize that and score them more accurately?

I agree with you - but whether or not Miki and Johnny were undermarked - I still did not see them on the podium.

I mentioned "fine tuning" but could have said "adjustments."
I don't agree with the UR rules or the "complete your rotations but fall" situation.

I think many judges need to be more conscientous about pcs - especially TR, IN and CH.
Do we really need a skater to say "neither one of us has transitions" before judges will recognize that and score them more accurately?

I agree about Miki and Johnny... but their scores (along with Bezic's comments...grrr...) really upset me because I thought both did better than were marked.

I don't always understand what goes into PCS but I do know that clean and technically superior should always beat out technically safe with a lot of arm flaying... but that's just me.